Complex Numbers

Sense of Wonder

Entry 7 of 8 for "Journalistic Intentions"  [18+], as usual selected at random

7. The only reason I would take up jogging is so that I could fit back into my Wonder Woman costume.

- Whiskerfaceschoolsout!

Ever notice that no one gives a shit if a chick wears a Batman costume, but a dude who wears a Wonder Woman outfit would be subject to all kinds of ridicule?

This isn't just because there is, canonically, a Batgirl and a Batwoman, both of whom wear some version of the Batsuit. No, it reflects a deeper problem with gender roles in society.

I'm sure all y'all with liberal arts degrees have already figured this out, but it took me a while.

The problem is this, and I'm using superheroes because I'm familiar with them and because they're inherent to the prompt: female versions of male superheroes are acceptable, while male versions of female superheroes are not. Or, well, I could extend that to "costumed adventurers," because not all comic book heroes are "super." But let's just assume that I'm talking about the unpowered as well as the superpowered here, because superpowers are really irrelevant to the discussion.

So you had, say, Superman, right? And later on, his cousin Kara shows up and she's in the same brightly colored suit but with a skirt (the current incarnation on TV wears pants, but that's not really my point). I've already mentioned the Batchicks. Hulk, and She-Hulk (to be fair, they're very different except for their bright green color). Iron Man, Iron Heart (I'm just glad they didn't call her Fe-Male). Don't get me wrong; there's nothing inherently bad about any of this (though She-Hulk's creation was, shall we say, a bit problematic), but I can't think of even one single instance where it went in the other direction.

That is, take the original canonical female superhero, Wonder Woman, because she's in the prompt. You can't just dress up a guy in the same kind of outfit and call him Wonder Man (yes, I know there is a Wonder Man, but he's an entirely different character and, besides, not even in the same universe). Wonder Woman's origin and entire reason for being is tied up (that's a pun for her magic lasso) in her gender. Black Widow? I mean, you can't even imagine a Black Widower, can you? It doesn't even make sense. Squirrel Girl? I mean, how would you even?

Point is, it seems to be perfectly okay, culturally, for women to take on originally male roles, but it's never been the same for men taking on traditionally female roles. When it does happen, outside of the superhero world, it's seen as some sort of appropriation, or the men involved are seen as somehow less than fully masculine.

I assert that we won't achieve gender parity until this can go in both directions; that is, until it's not seen as "demeaning" for a male character to take on the mantle of one created as a female. Just think about how things would be different if it had been Supergirl first, and then Superman. Or Batwoman first, and then Batman.

There's no logical reason for this; it just reflects the old, entrenched cultural way of thinking, that traditionally male roles are seen as superior to the traditionally female roles. I think that's probably changing, but slowly. "It's okay for a girl to be a tomboy, but never okay for a boy to be a girly-boy."

And no, I'm not going to wade into the quagmire where all of this intersects with issues of sexuality or gender identity.

Comic books are, as I've noted before, a blend of fantasy and science fiction, along with a few other genres thrown in for spice. Fantasy is a really good way to hold up a mirror to our own society, and sometimes, we're not going to like what we see.

So if you ever see a guy jogging down the street in a Wonder Woman costume, try not to leap (over tall buildings in a single bound) to conclusions. Me? I don't think I could pull it off. I don't have the tits for it.